Repair or alterations? Advice re LBC please

[MrsT]

I wonder if people here could give some advice about some building works we're having done on our house at the moment. (The house is Grade-II listed.)

At the moment, we're having some work done to one of the rooms, which had been converted from an attic storage room to a bedroom in the 60s. There was badly-fitted plasterboard on the two sloping walls, and a range of plasterboard, tiling, gypsum plaster, lime plaster and wattle and daub on the other two walls - it looks like they've been patched up over the years again and again with whatever the latest material of choice was. In some places, there's plasterboard over lime plaster, or lime plaster over wattle and daub.

We've taken most of the plasterboard down for a structural repair and to fix a damp issue. When that's done, we'd like to insultate (with wool) and then put back lime plaster on all the walls.

When I spoke to the CO about the works quite a while ago, I'm pretty sure she said that the whole job, including taking the plasterboard down, insulating, and re-plastering would be a repair, not an alteration (and she gave me a bit of a look as though to say 'isn't that obvious?'). But I'm now worrying that going from plasterboard to lime plaster on two walls is quite a big difference in the appearance of the room, and I should be asking for consent for the plastering - but I can't face having a room with no insulation at all for a couple of months, as the cold is flooding into the rest of the house. I'm worried that if I phone her for advice, it will turn out to be an Alteration, and we'll have to stop while I put in an application.

Does putting back lime plaster throughout instead of plasterboard and gypsum sound like a repair or like alterations to people here? Or am I being a complete idiot, and would no-one ever expect you to have two walls lime plaster and two walls plasterboard?

I'd be very grateful for people's advice. Thanks.

 

[Tom]

If you've taken the plasterboard down because it needed repair, then that's a repair...surely? :wink:

 

[Pford75]

There are other more expert members here (including one or two COs), but my feeling is as follows.

If there is water ingress and damage is being caused, then it is permissible to make structural repairs (as you put it) and then deal with consents retrospectively.

I suspect that many COs would be pleased for you to return the room to lime plaster and would not even request a LB application...but some may. (some may even argue that the 1960s plasterboard is historical in its own right and should be retained)

If it was me, I wldnt worry.

 

[middi]

Hi Mrs T

If I interpreted your post correctly I would have to agree with your CO and consider your job in hand as a " repair " , after all that is exactly what you are doing - repairing the bulding to make it waterproof. The fact that you have to destroy " fabric" to effectuate the repair is absolutely necessary and therefore this has to be reinstated, at the same time exploit the possibility to add extra insulation ,

The " reinstate" part of the destroyed fabric may be of interest to some CO's. If, as you have suggested, you would like to use lime plaster this is not only good for the building but it should also be very acceptable to all the CO's I know. In which case it would still be part of a repair.
( many people would just use plasterboard and one coat plaster with as much insulation as they could fit in and most cases the CO's I know would also be happy with this arrangement, considering you existing " mish-mash" of materials at present.)

Alteration is a proposition that ALL the CO's I know would be very interested in, a law would be broken if formal application for consent was not sought. Alteration of a listed building would be an interference with it's original structure ( and usually appearance), and this is one of the main reason why a building was listed in the first place.
Whilst is not imperative to seek permission for repairs it is couteous to let the CO know what you intend to repair, if only to reassure yourself that you are going sbout it in the right manner.

Middi

 

[MrsT]

Dear all

Thanks very much for your thoughts and advice. I've come to the conclusion that it is fairly definitely a repair, but that it would be sensible to let the CO know what we're up to to avoid any misunderstandings later. I've sent her an email to explain the situation, so I'll see what happens. Of course, if it does need consent, at least we'll get our VAT off!

Best wishes

Mrs T

 

[Pford75]

AIUI, VAT relief is only available where LBC is required and sought in advance of the works being undertaken. The fact that it is an alteration is not sufficient to claim the VAT

 

[MrsT]

Thanks again everyone. I thought I'd let you know that the CO replied to say that the works would indeed be seen as repairs, and what's more, that something she had previously suggested would be an alteration would also be seen as a repair. So I can't help wondering if this is the power of saying we're going to replaster with lime! The room will certainly look a good deal better when we're finished with it. (For a start, you'll be able to see, and the roof won't collapse on your head, so that's always a good start.)

 

[MatthewC]

At the risk of upsetting the applecart, surely the addition of wool insulation is an alteration?

 

[middi]

At the risk of upsetting the applecart, surely the addition of wool insulation is an alteration?

One could say that anybody that interferes with the structure,the fabric and aesthetic effect of a listed building could be classified as alteration.It is all a matter of interpretion and common sense, common sense from the owners in having reasonable understanding about listed buildings and the purpose for their status and interpretation from a CO to guide in judication as to what constitutes alterations.

If ,for example, a few peg tiles need replacing , is one going to put in a LBC application to replace these ?, of course not. Any CO would expect the owner to keep the building in safe condition ( a legal requirement, by the way) and REPAIR the roof and as long as the replaced tiles match the existing everybody is happy.

If, on another note, whilst on that same terracotta coloured roof doing REPAIRS you decide to istall a new dormer ( maybe you need more light !! ) then LBC application would be needed because you are not only interfering with the structural integrity of the roof you are also altering the appearance of the roof--ALTERATION-
In the context of the original question of this topic. Roof leak= repair; destruction of some fabric by default to effect roof repairs, again=repair; addition of insulation ( appropriate for building) whilst doing repairs can hardly be alteration simply because it is an ADDITION and not destroying or affecting any part of that building ( unless one counts keeping it warmer an alteration). This is why there are strict guidelines to follow when tempering with a L/building and if unsure obtain advise from a CO. It is his job to interpret the guidelines, as to how strict these turn out to be is purely an interpretation for each individual case

Middi

 

[Penners]

the CO replied to say that the works would indeed be seen as repairs, and what's more, that something she had previously suggested would be an alteration would also be seen as a repair. So I can't help wondering if this is the power of saying we're going to replaster with lime!

I'm glad to hear that your fears were unfounded, Mrs T. When you say that your CO "replied", did she do this verbally or in writing?

It's always a good idea to get such opinions in writing, just to protect yourself against any misunderstanding in the future. As you've seen, CO's don't have perfect recall (just like the rest of us) and she has already taken a slightly different stance on part of your works - to your advantage. So even in the case of informal consents such as this, the written word is always advisable.

If she replied by email I would be happy with that, provided her phraseology was unequivocal.